If any of you care to take on the 1,966 data points, I’m all ears!
[See the full post at: Microsoft’s newfound telemetry transparency with 1,966 basic data points]
|
Patch reliability is unclear. Unless you have an immediate, pressing need to install a specific patch, don't do it. |
-
Microsoft’s newfound telemetry transparency with 1,966 basic data points
- This topic has 48 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago.
Viewing 15 reply threadsAuthor-
1st, I no longer trust them.
2nd, they don’t need 1996 data points — which are not even all — to keep Windows running.
3rd, all this uploading must consume system resources.
4 users thanked author for this post.
-
Not to mention just the gathering of the info slowing systems down and filling disks.
Remember when the OS was just there to facilitate people’s work?
-Noel
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Why isn’t the default privacy setting OFF with nothing to anyone for any reason? Plus write the EULA and Privacy Statement in plain English not Shyster.
Phoning home should under the user’s complete control to determine what they want to allow.
-
It CAN be under user control – if you’re geeky enough. 🙂 I can definitively say, after watching firewall logs for a few days, that it’s possible to quash ALL unwanted mothership calls.
But it comes at a cost. You have to be willing to do only traditional desktop things. The whole App realm pretty much hinges on having constant and unfettered network connectivity (integration with the store, use of a Microsoft account, etc.).
Microsoft needed only to invent some “must have” Apps and they would have had those of us who prefer our systems to remain private by the ….
Trouble is, no one at Microsoft stopped to think that there’s not all that much useful that can be accomplished in the mobile realm.
-Noel
-
If any of you care to take on the 1,966 data points, I’m all ears!
Is it me or does everything Microsoft publishes smack of weasel words, even when they claim to be transparent?
For example, one of the first sections they describe as “Common data” says this about what user data is collected:
•User ID — a unique identifier associated with the user’s Microsoft Account (if one is used) or local account. The user’s Microsoft Account identifier is not collected from devices configured to send Basic diagnostic data
One could be forgiven for, after reading that carefully a few times, STILL thinking that Microsoft is going to be sent information about your local account regardless of what diagnostic data level you specify.
I don’t really understand all this data gathering aggressiveness. I DO see why Microsoft wants diagnostic data – they can actually make the product better with it. But not to allow users to fully opt out is just wrong. They have a closed system – they need to understand that trust doesn’t come cheap, and frankly they’ve really blown it on that score over the past few years. Just have systems configured to send telemetry out of the box, but allow users to opt completely out of it. Then provide those same, savvy users who opted out the ability to report problems themselves if they have them. Oh wait, that’s what we already had.
-Noel
-
It isn’t just you. I also interpret your quote to mean that Microsoft is going to be sent information about your local account regardless of what diagnostic data level you specify.
Well spotted, it is easy to miss.
Windows 10 Home 22H2, Acer Aspire TC-1660 desktop + LibreOffice, non-techie
3 users thanked author for this post.
-
Yep, I ran Mr Brian’s Diagtrack test in Basic and Full telemetry modes and ‘localid’ was present in both data sets. :< Of course I don’t have complete verification that it is transmitted in basic mode, but the presumption of ‘Yes’ is likely accurate.
-
For all we know, the “Basic” setting could be the same as “Full”, ie M$ tricking Win 10 users into feeling better about having minimized Telemetry & Data collection by M$.
If the settings are not the same, imagine the number of full data points being collected by M$. 4,000 ?
1 user thanked author for this post.
All of the above comments just give me MORE reasons why I DO NOT want or need Win10. This snooping SHOULD be able to be turned off EASILY and PERMANENTLY.
Dave
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
This snooping SHOULD be able to be turned off EASILY and PERMANENTLY.
Very good point about permanency. I used O&O ShutUp10 right after the Creator’s Update went in and found a few settings had been returned to the red side by Microsoft’s upgrade process. Not a large number of them, but not zero either.
-Noel
1 user thanked author for this post.
The easy answer, just never let Win 10 connect to the net. Use another OS to browse the net and download the updates you need with that. Use a shared external USB drive for file transfers. Done. No mo MS snooping. 🙂
Windows 10 Pro 22H2
-
What personally identifiable data is collected if diagnostics is set to basic?
Are you serious?
We can’t possibly know the content of the data collected. Microsoft encrypts it. Even if it weren’t encrypted, who would be able to look inside the data packets and know what the ones and zeros really mean?
We can only infer what’s being collected based on documentation, and the documentation has clearly been written by lawyers – folks who are being paid to write copy that sounds like one thing when it means another.
I ask in return:
Where’s the proof that no personally identifying information is collected, and that it’s not stored in a way (e.g., with the IP address of the origin) that it could not be collated with other info to determine a person’s identity?
And let’s think about what was collected in the moments before the setting was changed to be more restrictive by the user who has just set up a new system, shall we? Is that all just thrown away?
Most folks know that “big data” can be mined to make connections between IP address, name, address, phone number, etc.
-Noel
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
What personally identifiable data do you infer from the documentation is collected if diagnostics is set to basic?
I presume you’re still asking the question of Woody, but it seems to me we have every reason to believe that anything not explicitly excluded by the written policy, plus probably half a dozen other obscure legal documents, is fair game.
It’s pretty clear from the paragraph I highlighted earlier in this thread that local account info is not explicitly excluded. My own local account name includes my actual name. How many other folks’ local account names are derived from their real names?
Not personally identifiable, eh?
Beyond that, what more can be made of the information taken in total to identify the user – outside of some court’s legal definition – is a fair subject for discussion regardless of whether you wish to exclude it, counselor.
What’s funny in all this is that as a software engineer I understand better than most why Microsoft would like legitimate telemetry to make the operating system better. That they have chosen to increase telemetry, make it impossible to opt completely out, and ultimately to hide behind legalese – not to mention other things they’ve been doing lately, such as clearly NOT making the operating system better – are pretty darned good reasons to suspect they have motives beyond the obvious.
-Noel
-
-
-
I’ve seen the device’s and user’s ‘localid’ in six different data sets of Diagtrack capturing tests, setting the telemetry between Basic and Full.
The identity hash strings have not changed between sessions or rebooting of the test machine, they are supposed to be unique to each machine and user.
4 users thanked author for this post.
-
b says, “What personally identifiable data is collected if diagnostics is set to basic?”
It is a fact that with Cookies, Telemetry & Data collection, online services companies are able to dish out targeted ads to their users and sell users-data to marketers. They do this mainly based on personal Device ID and not actual Personal ID.
To further obtain actual Personal ID, the companies would usually have to go through the ISP, eg sue in court, as per …….
http://www.pcworld.com/article/230515/So_Youre_Being_Sued_for_Piracy.html
This is because Internet users are required to register with their real Personal ID before they can get Internet access from the ISP, eg cyberbullies and Muslim terrorists in USA can be traced and personally identified/ID.Without going through the ISP, now, a company like MS, may likely be able to obtain the Personal ID of Win 10 users by just putting in some extra effort, eg “spy” on or collect Telemetry & Data of the users’ webcams/Windows Hello log-in/fingerprints, keystrokes(for passwords), email contents, social media activities, forum posts, online comments, online purchases, online banking, online government dealings, etc.
Ignorant Win 10 users who go online are bound to be easily and personally ID by MS, on top of having already been Device ID by MS.IOW, better to avoid using Win 10.
But a few Win 10 users will likely say that they won’t mind being personally ID by MS because they have done nothing wrong/illegal online, ie they are not Windows/Office/X-Box pirates, cyberbullies, terrorists, etc. This is a very myopic, selfish and non-compassionate view-point bc often some other innocents may be falsely accused by MS of wrongdoing and this kind of “spying” powers is very much open to abuse, eg for political or business purposes(steal trade secrets and eavesdrop on business dealings).-
But a few Win 10 users will likely say that they won’t mind being personally ID by MS because they have done nothing wrong/illegal online
When people say this, all I hear is someone that doesn’t care about their rights anymore because they feel they don’t need them and therefore no one else should either. Personally, I do a lot of paper shredding before throwing it in the recycle bin especially when it has my address on it, but what the people who use the “nothing to hide” fallacy are saying is it should be okay if someone went into those shredded documents and pieced them back together to get my address and I shouldn’t care because I “have nothing to hide”, right?
There are so many things wrong with the “nothing to hide” argument because everyone has something to hide and it doesn’t necessarily mean someone has done anything wrong. I’m not sure people really understand what privacy is and why it’s important to not let anyone take it away. We already know they hide microphones/cameras in TV’s and cable boxes, so in an era where everything can connect to the internet, what’s next? An out-of-control corporate fascist environment like the one we live in will be able to find something to blackmail or even prosecute people with if desired. I really wish the whole “nothing to hide” argument would just go away because it’s nothing more than a huge, apathetic fallacy. If I asked you to hand me your cell phone so I could go through it, what would your answer be? What, no? You must have something bad you’re hiding in there, huh?
3 users thanked author for this post.
-
-
Viewing 15 reply threads
Plus Membership
Donations from Plus members keep this site going. You can identify the people who support AskWoody by the Plus badge on their avatars.
AskWoody Plus members not only get access to all of the contents of this site -- including Susan Bradley's frequently updated Patch Watch listing -- they also receive weekly AskWoody Plus Newsletters (formerly Windows Secrets Newsletter) and AskWoody Plus Alerts, emails when there are important breaking developments.
Get Plus!
Recent Topics
-
Finding Microsoft Office 2021 product key
by 51 minutes ago
-
Over-the-Top solves it!
by 11 hours, 22 minutes ago
-
To Susan – Woody Leonhard, the “Lionhearted”
by 18 hours, 23 minutes ago
-
Extracting Data From All Sheets
by 19 hours, 58 minutes ago
-
Use wushowhide in Windows 11 24H2?
by 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
-
Hacktool:Win32/Winring0
by 6 hours, 47 minutes ago
-
Microsoft Defender as Primary Security Question
by 1 hour, 32 minutes ago
-
USB printers might print random text with the January 2025 preview update
by 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
-
Google’s 10-year-old Chromecast is busted, but a fix is coming
by 1 day, 8 hours ago
-
Expand the taskbar?
by 1 day, 8 hours ago
-
Gregory Forrest “Woody” Leonhard (1951-2025)
by 2 hours, 5 minutes ago
-
March 2025 updates are out
by 51 minutes ago
-
Windows 11 Insider Preview build 26120.3380 released to DEV and BETA
by 2 days, 1 hour ago
-
Update Firefox to prevent add-ons issues from root certificate expiration
by 2 days, 8 hours ago
-
Latest Firefox requires Password on start up
by 2 days, 3 hours ago
-
Resolved : AutoCAD 2022 might not open after updating to 24H2
by 2 days, 21 hours ago
-
Missing api-ms-win-core-libraryloader-11-2-1.dll
by 1 day, 20 hours ago
-
How Much Daylight have YOU Saved?
by 1 day, 23 hours ago
-
A brief history of Windows Settings
by 1 day, 17 hours ago
-
Thunderbolt is not just for monitors
by 1 day, 15 hours ago
-
Password Generators — Your first line of defense
by 1 day, 21 hours ago
-
AskWoody at the computer museum
by 21 hours, 3 minutes ago
-
Planning for the unexpected
by 1 day, 22 hours ago
-
Which printer type is the better one to buy?
by 2 days, 23 hours ago
-
Upgrading the web server
by 2 days, 21 hours ago
-
New Windows 11 24H2 Setup – Initial Win Update prevention settings?
by 3 days, 17 hours ago
-
Creating a Google account
by 3 days, 15 hours ago
-
Undocumented “backdoor” found in Bluetooth chip used by a billion devices
by 3 days, 22 hours ago
-
Microsoft Considering AI Models to Replace OpenAI’s in Copilot
by 4 days, 9 hours ago
-
AI *emergent misalignment*
by 4 days, 10 hours ago
Remembering Woody
